You are clearly well-studied in Dhamma, and insightful to boot. I can certainly give some replies to your questions but seriously I think you could do just as well.

I'm afraid not. My talent is limited to spotting problems. I'm a basketcase when it comes to finding solutions to them - for that I have to turn to wiser heads. Thanks a lot for your thoughtful response._________Grimnasty

nibbuti wrote:Are you aware that the doubt hindrance (vicikicchā), as the Buddha taught it, is specifically about wholesome & unwholesome states (dhammas) and their causes, in the sense of the four noble truths, which doesn't have to include just any dogma or view that is considered 'Buddhist'?

In the Dhammasangani the fetter of doubt includes doubt about the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha, the training, the past and future, and idapaccayata. I think most of these are mentioned in various suttas too.If someone's abandoned doubts about the Buddha and now has "unshakable faith" in him (one of the attributes of a stream enterer according to the Datthabba Sutta), I shouldn't imagine she'd have any hesitation at all in accepting Buddhist dogmas.I mean don't you think it would be a bit odd for a person of unshakable faith to say: "Gotama may have had some cool things to say about the four truths, but I think he was must have been having a bad hair day when he taught all that kamma and rebirth baloney" ?

in reality one does not need to know anything about rebirth at all. one can simply practice the dhamma, see through reality bit by bit and eventually enter nibbana never knowing a thing about rebirth being real or not

Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana , meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma). . It is also called kankhavitarana visuddhi ( Escape from all Doubt Purification- one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth)

hey that's my quote! interesting. i wonder if it's a clearly specified necessity in the pali canon? or if any texts imply that one can reach nibbana without knowledge about it? i know there are some instances where people reach nibbana (or other high attainment) simply by hearing the buddha talk. the one i can think of is where he spoke to the assassins, but the talk is not detailed so i don't know whether it covered rebirth or not. so this could be some support for my idea. who knows? anyone have good canon references that say very clearly one must know about rebirth or that one can not know about it?

perhaps it's a theoretical question that really cannot be answered.

maybe a question such as: could the buddha have lead someone to nibbana without ever telling them about rebirth?

i think he could have, and in all likelihood he did, i just don't know of where it's in the suttas specifically. i know many times he gave dhamma talks to large groups of monks who were of other traditions and many attained dhamma attainments upon hearing his words and that the suttas do not always specify that they knew about the buddha's specific rebirth teachings prior to the talk nor that the buddha mentions rebirth specifically in said talk (but i could be wrong...).

Mr. Grimnasty wrote:I mean don't you think it would be a bit odd for a person of unshakable faith to say: "Gotama may have had some cool things to say about the four truths, but I think he was must have been having a bad hair day when he taught all that kamma and rebirth baloney" ?

Obviously, there isn't a 1:1 correlation between the Nikayas and what we'd have if there had been audio recording for ~45 years. It's simply problematic to wave the Nikayas and say "the Buddha said it", to say nothing of much of the Tipitika.

This might seem to go without saying, but when this fact is allowed, a not altogether unexpected cultural impact on the texts can start to be examined - and, far from considering the Buddha to be a frazzled teacher, we can consider the oral tradition to be comprised of historical humans.

This isn't the sub-forum for this kind of thing, but I felt a note in passing was justified.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

daverupa wrote:Obviously, there isn't a 1:1 correlation between the Nikayas and what we'd have if there had been audio recording for ~45 years. It's simply problematic to wave the Nikayas and say "the Buddha said it", to say nothing of much of the Tipitika.

I don't think it's "simply problematic". Rather, it's problematic in certain cases, but not in others. For example, it's problematic in cases where interpreters of the Nikayas are attempting to draw large conclusions from rather slim textual evidence, especially where that evidence is amenable to a variety of interpretations. But only the most rascally disingenué would stoop to asserting that Nikaya-waving is problematic in the case of a teaching as scripturally omnipresent as kamma and rebirth.

Well, in any event I agree it's anything but simple when the textual chronology is considered.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

Mr. Grimnasty wrote:If someone's abandoned doubts about the Buddha and now has "unshakable faith" in him (one of the attributes of a stream enterer according to the Datthabba Sutta), I shouldn't imagine she'd have any hesitation at all in accepting Buddhist dogmas.

What is the abandonment of doubts regarding the Dhamma based on? What makes this different from a 'new born' Christian who has entered the Jesus-stream and, from there on, believes the Earth is 6000 years old?

Mr. Grimnasty wrote:But only the most rascally disingenué would stoop to asserting that Nikaya-waving is problematic in the case of a teaching as scripturally omnipresent as kamma and rebirth.

It would be problematic in the case of kamma and rebirth to deny it is present. But I don't think it is omnipresent, rather mostly taught as a moral teaching or in a specific context. Not once does the Buddha care to explain how post-mortem rebirth works (unlike in the case of dependent origination of dukkha).

Also, any translation is an interpretation with different emphasis. When I talk to a faithful Christian I have no problem mentioning God as a synonym for 'nature' or 'father figure'. It comes with common language. But that does not mean belief in God is essential to me, or that it requires a 'father figure' to understand 'nature'.

nibbuti wrote:What is the abandonment of doubts regarding the Dhamma based on?

The arising of a deep insight into the nature of things as a consequence of hearing the Dhamma and which would not otherwise have arisen. Having found the Dhamma reliable in this, one is disposed to treat it as reliable in everything else.

What makes this different from a 'new born' Christian who has entered the Jesus-stream and, from there on, believes the Earth is 6000 years old?

The noble disciple has unshakable saddha in the Dhamma; the born-again Christian has unwholesome resolvedness upon (akusala adhimokkha) and attachment to (lobha) the theistic superstition.The noble disciple has a samsaric heritage sufficiently replete with wisdom that he can discern the faithworthiness of faithworthy objects (the Triple Gem), encountering which is the proximate cause of saddha. The born-again Christian has a samsaric heritage that has left him so lacking in panna that he cannot discern the wrongness in a serious wrong view.

Mr. Grimnasty wrote:I mean don't you think it would be a bit odd for a person of unshakable faith to say: "Gotama may have had some cool things to say about the four truths, but I think he was must have been having a bad hair day when he taught all that kamma and rebirth baloney" ?

Obviously, there isn't a 1:1 correlation between the Nikayas and what we'd have if there had been audio recording for ~45 years. It's simply problematic to wave the Nikayas and say "the Buddha said it", to say nothing of much of the Tipitika.

This might seem to go without saying, but when this fact is allowed, a not altogether unexpected cultural impact on the texts can start to be examined - and, far from considering the Buddha to be a frazzled teacher, we can consider the oral tradition to be comprised of historical humans.

This isn't the sub-forum for this kind of thing, but I felt a note in passing was justified.

either we accept the tipitaka as authoritative, or we don't. there is some room for saying things like "this passage appears only ONE time in the entire canon and disagrees with EVERYTHING else in it. it probably does not belong." or something similar to that. however to say anything about what the buddha did or did not say in regards to something so common and specific as his talks on rebirth is to throw out the entire tipitaka as unreliable. if all those instances are some kind of bad transmission then so is everything else and none of it has any real value beyond what each individual finds useful for them personally. if we do that we are down to just personal experience, hypothesis, and conjecture and this entire thread has no use to anyone any more in a buddhist sense and is just a thread about opinions and random thoughts that could just as well exist on facebook or somewhere else that has nothing to do with any of this.

clearly this thread is about theravada buddhism. being that it's posted on this forum and is about doctrinal questions, it is only logical to look into the doctrine of theravada buddhism. if you're going to throw the doctrinal texts out as unreliable then the thread itself loses purpose for you so why keep at it if you feel this way? see what i'm saying? if you don't believe the texts are accurate then you have made your stake in this discussion redundant since the discussion is about the information found in those very texts more or less as beyond the texts there is really no official authority on things such as "attaining nibbana without knowing about kamma and rebirth" and other such things.

Yeah, as I had said "This isn't the sub-forum for this kind of thing", but the flippant remark to which I was drawn was low-hanging fruit.

Bad habits, alas.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

Mr. Grimnasty wrote:The noble disciple has unshakable saddha in the Dhamma; the born-again Christian has unwholesome resolvedness upon (akusala adhimokkha) and attachment to (lobha) the theistic superstition.

Do you think the born-again Christian would agree that he has "unwholesome resolvedness upon superstition" while the "noble disciple has unshakable faith"?

I disagree with those who say that the Sutta's clearly teach literal rebirth, and that the 'psychological' interpretation is a modern perversion. Consider the following quote, from, What the Buddha Taught, by Walpola Rahula, page 33:

"When the Aggregates arise, decay and die, O Bhikkhu, every moment you are born, decay and die." (note 1)

"Note 1. Prmj.I(PTS), p.78.'Khandhesu jayamanesu jiyamanesu miyamanesu ca khane khane tvam bhikkhu jayase ca jiyase ca miyase ca.' This is quoted in the Paramatthajotika Commentary as the Buddha's own words. So far I have not been able to trace this passage back to its original text."

[Oh, embarrassment. I hit edit rather than reply and did not catch it until I edited out part of vinasp's comments on the above, as I was composing my brilliant response to this. Please forgive me my clumsy mistake, vinasp, and please repost the above with your comments. -- tilt, the clumsy.]

robertk wrote:I think mr grimmnasty is referring to the pali term, often used in the texts, pubbekatapunnata, merit done/accumulayed in past lives. And that merit includes wisdom .

pubbekatapuññata seems to literally say merit (puñña) done (kata) in the past (pubbe). Where does past life figure into it?

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

vis. xivthey arenevertheless distinguishable in five aspects, that is to say, as achievement, masteryof scriptures, hearing, questioning, and prior effort. [..]. Mastery of scriptures is mastery of the Buddha’s word.Hearing is learning the Dhamma carefully and attentively. Questioning isdiscussion of knotty passages and explanatory passages in the texts,commentaries, and so on. Prior effort is devotion to insight in the dispensation offormer Buddhas, up to the vicinity of [the stages of] conformity and change-oflineageby one who has practiced [the duty of] going [with the meditation subjecton alms round] and coming back [with it].29. Others have said:A prior effort, and great knowledge,[Knowledge of] dialects, of scriptures,And questioning, and then achievement,And likewise waiting on a teacher,Success in friends—these are conditionsProductive of discriminations.

in reality one does not need to know anything about rebirth at all. one can simply practice the dhamma, see through reality bit by bit and eventually enter nibbana never knowing a thing about rebirth being real or not

Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana , meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma). . It is also called kankhavitarana visuddhi ( Escape from all Doubt Purification- one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth)

To attian Nibbana one should undestand four noble truths whic include Kamma and rebirth:

These four truths are: 1.the truth of the impermanency, unsatisfactoriness and impersonality of existence; 2.the truth that repeated rebirth and misery are rooted in self-illusion and craving for existence; 3.the truth that through the extinction of all self-illusion vanity, and craving, deliverance from all rebirth will be attained; 4.the truth that the eightfold path, based on right understanding, is the path leading to this goal.

in reality one does not need to know anything about rebirth at all. one can simply practice the dhamma, see through reality bit by bit and eventually enter nibbana never knowing a thing about rebirth being real or not

Actually in the vipassana nanas one of the earlier stages is called paccayapariggahanana , meaning that it is seen that every moment is conditioned by other moments (including kamma). . It is also called kankhavitarana visuddhi ( Escape from all Doubt Purification- one no longer doubts truths like kamma or rebirth)

To attian Nibbana one should undestand four noble truths whic include Kamma and rebirth:

These four truths are: 1.the truth of the impermanency, unsatisfactoriness and impersonality of existence; 2.the truth that repeated rebirth and misery are rooted in self-illusion and craving for existence; 3.the truth that through the extinction of all self-illusion vanity, and craving, deliverance from all rebirth will be attained; 4.the truth that the eightfold path, based on right understanding, is the path leading to this goal.